When one stops to think about it, the notion that governments would take it upon themselves to educate children is rather strange. Governments may be well-suited for tasks such as building highways, or fighting wars, or regulating economies—but educating 7-year olds? Isn’t that rather an odd idea?

I highly recommend for your reading a slim 72 page volume written by Dr. Tim Johnson, ABC News Senior Medical Contributor, titled The Truth About Getting Sick in America: The Real Problems with Health Care and What We Can Do (Hyperion: 2010).

Two years later as pundits projected how the Supreme Court would rule, they confirmed the heart of the opposition's arguments; "State's rights", but they miscalculated the level of ideological loyalty within the nation's highest court.

The Supreme Court will rule tomorrow on the constitutionality of major provisions of the Affordable Care Act, the health care reform package crafted by President Obama and Congressional Democrats. As we await the ruling on this legislation, let me offer a few thoughts on the economics and spiraling costs of health care in the United States, the kind of health care reform we really need, and what we as Christians can do to help meet needs now.

Health insurance functions in largely the same way as other forms of insurance. Consumers bet they will get sick, and insurers bet that they won’t. However, the health insurance market has characteristics that distinguish it from other insurance markets and make it quite complicated as a matter of public policy.

#1: The U. S. Supreme Court will soon pass judgment on whether the “individual mandate” requirement in President Obama’s Health Care initiative is constitutional. What are your views about this issue?

#2: If the “individual mandate” is declared unconstitutional, are there other workable and politically feasible means for providing adequate health care coverage for all Americans?

#3: If you object to President Obama’s Health Care Initiative, what would you put in its place?

#4: The costs associated with health care continue to spiral. Are there workable and politically feasible means for reducing such costs? Can costs be contained without sacrificing the quality of or access to adequate health care services for all Americans?

For the purpose of this discussion, I will stick to the question of public policy. Given the fact that we live in a pluralistic democracy with a spectrum of experiences and deeply held convictions at play, how then shall we live together?

In my experience, when Christians consider same sex marriage as a public policy issue, we often approach the subject as if we were in church. If we believe homosexual relationships are not part of God’s design, we say that governments should not recognize these relationships because they are sinful. Similarly, if we believe that the church should embrace homosexual Christians who make public commitments to each other, we conclude that the legal definition of marriage should be revised to include these relationships. My view is that these arguments may be beside the point.

It is hard to speak out as an advocate for traditional marriage today because so many observers immediately equate opposition to same-sex marriage with hatred or fear. As I hope to demonstrate below, I support marriage as a union between a man and a woman not out of dislike of gays and lesbians but out of conviction that traditional marriage is a universal social institution created by God for the good of all humanity. I hope that our discussion on this emotionally-charged issue will model a truly alternative political conversation with a spirit of mutual respect and desire for understanding.